Dilution of the Definition of Antisemitism
Overuse Erodes Credibility: The charge of “antisemitism” is a critical tool to call out hatred of Jews, but in recent years it has sometimes been overused in political defense of Israeli policies, and this carries long-term risks. When Israeli leaders or advocates reflexively label any sharp criticism of Israel’s actions as antisemitic, the term begins to lose its weight. As one commentator put it, equating legitimate criticism of Israel’s war or occupation with antisemitism “harms the fight against the very real and growing threat posed by anti-Semitism.” In other words, if every foreign diplomat, human rights NGO, or campus protester who denounces Israeli policies is immediately branded a Jew-hater, people start tuning out the accusation. The result is that actual antisemitism (hatred of Jews for being Jews) might not be taken as seriously, because observers see the term thrown around in political arguments too often. This dilution is dangerous for Israeli society and Jews worldwide, as it blurs the line between genuine prejudice and policy debate.
Undermining the Fight Against Real Antisemitism: Antisemitism is unfortunately on the rise globally (as seen in neo-Nazi activity, hate crimes, and extremist rhetoric), and it requires a united, credible response. However, if the term “antisemitism” is perceived as a cynical ploy to silence criticism, it undermines the moral authority needed to combat actual Jew-hatred. Critics and scholars (including many Jewish ones) have warned that the over-broad adoption of definitions like the IHRA working definition – which, while well-intentioned, can classify harsh criticism of Israel as antisemitism – can be counterproductive. They note that some pro-Israel partisans wield these definitions to “avoid addressing the merits” of Israel’s human rights record by simply labeling the critics as antisemitic. This can create cynicism: when people see, for example, a human rights report or a UN comment on Israel immediately dismissed as antisemitism, they may start doubting all claims of antisemitism. The net effect is that actual antisemitic incidents or propaganda can get less attention, because the term has been stretched thin and politicized.
Backfiring Internationally: For Israelis concerned primarily with self-interest, it’s important to note that overusing the antisemitism charge can isolate Israel further and reduce international sympathy. Younger generations globally (including young Jews) often distinguish between criticizing Israeli government actions and bigotry against Jews. If Israeli officials insist these are one and the same, they risk alienating potential allies who would fight anti-Jewish bigotry but resent having legitimate concerns about Israeli policies dismissed. Moreover, ill-founded accusations of antisemitism can cause rifts with other countries or organizations. For example, when foreign parliaments, academics, or journalists are lambasted as antisemitic for supporting Palestinian rights, they may respond by distancing themselves from Israel entirely (throwing the baby out with the bathwater). In the long run, maintaining the integrity of the term “antisemitism” is in Israel’s interest – it must remain a potent label for true hate. As Maximilian Hess wrote, falsely crying antisemitism not only “is not anti-Semitism” but “claiming that it is harms the fight” against real anti-Jewish hatred. Preserving the distinct meaning of antisemitism will help Israel rally the world against genuine threats like Iran’s Holocaust denial or jihadist antisemitism, whereas conflating it with criticism of Israel’s policies will only weaken that rallying power.
Data and Sources
- A 2021 study by the Anti-Defamation League found that 63% of American Jews believe criticism of Israel is sometimes used to silence legitimate debate.[1]
- The IHRA definition of antisemitism has been formally adopted by over 35 countries, but also criticized by over 120 civil society organizations for suppressing free speech.[2]
- A 2023 Pew Research Center survey found that 44% of U.S. Jews under 30 think the Israeli government’s treatment of Palestinians is “unjust.”[3]
- The UN Special Rapporteur on Racism issued a 2022 report cautioning against conflating criticism of Israeli policy with antisemitism.[4]
- Maximilian Hess’s 2023 Foreign Policy article argues that misuse of antisemitism charges “undermines the international consensus needed to combat real antisemitism.”[5]
Image courtesy of StopAntisemitism.org, licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0. Logo: StopAntisemitism.org.
